|
![]() |
#11 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
I appreciate the info.. I am not real sure what I am going to build or get just yet, I just have the original 307 now and thought it might be a good starter combination but I didn't want to have to work real hard on a combination and still fall short of the index. It sounds like it may be in my best interest to go with try something other than a 307...I am really used to no/e racing in the 10 second to 12 second range so I may be looking for a combination that will put me there.
__________________
Tim Wilson HR/SST 4301 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 3,600
Liked 7,779 Times in 1,742 Posts
|
![]()
Tim, just a little food for thought, you mentioned looking for a "starter combination". The biggest problem that you will have with building a 350 or 396 combo (even the 2V) is going to be with the classes that these combos fall into. You can build a "starter combo" and go racing with these combinations but you had better be willing to get beat in any heads up races that you may run into. I'm not trying to dissuade you from coming into Stock Eliminator but I do want you to understand coming in that it's (contrary to what you might hear) not like building a SST or Bracket car. Where I'm going with this is that you might consider doing the 307 car (do it as a 71 or 72 it fits Q and R) because you're going to be dealing with a combo that any competent machine shop can build for you. The carb is too small but on the plus side because of that it doesn't need an "enhanced" set of heads and intake and it won't want a big cam that will kill valvetrain parts. Think of it kind of like a "kindergarden" combo! It will let you into the eliminator to learn the ropes and the right people to deal with so that when you do "step up" you will be in a position to know the right people to go to and parts to get. Just my $.02
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
thanks Billy, I will still heavily consider the 307...like I said it is what I have already and I am sure I can build it pretty cheap. I am planning on trying to get it together by next year and if successful then I will run IHRA and NHRA div4 stuff. If I do go with the 307 I might have to contact you or anyone else you might recommend with some questions as I go with it.
If you don't mind me asking...what is a good stall converter, shift point, and crossing point rpm. My dad has built transmissions and converters for a long time (Wilson Racing transmissions and converters Moore, OK) so I can play around with it, but I would like to know where to start...thanks.
__________________
Tim Wilson HR/SST 4301 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 3,600
Liked 7,779 Times in 1,742 Posts
|
![]()
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Marion, N.Y.
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]()
Billy Nees, what are your thoughts on the 307 combo in a '70 chevelle. I think this would be a natural Q car, not sure though.
I know the carb is still the issue. But i also have the parts to build a 307. I already race in stock but with a crate motor and im looking for the "NHRA" option for next season. Thanks, John Beasaw III F/CM 1096 '70 chevelle |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 3,600
Liked 7,779 Times in 1,742 Posts
|
![]()
John, again you should do a 71 or 72 car for thr HP. Believe it or not, I like the Chevelle better than the Nova because it can make U/SA.
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 64
Liked 780 Times in 194 Posts
|
![]()
Billy -
Wouldn't the '77-'79 305 2-bbl also be a good choice because of the bigger carb and better intake/head? Lots of choices for cheap bodies. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
![]()
Dwight
Didn't you have a post on here aways back, "quite aways", about a guy who ran that 305, 2bl combo, in a Malibu/Camaro? Went 3 or 4 under before the hp drop? Last edited by skooter; 01-23-2011 at 12:40 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On a hilltop in Pa.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 3,600
Liked 7,779 Times in 1,742 Posts
|
![]()
78 305 2V combo is much better than the 307. Better head, intake (aluminum) and carb (325cfm vs. 266 cfm). Tim said that he had a 70 Nova so I am assuming that he will want to use it.
__________________
Billy Nees 1188 STK, SS I'm not spending 100K to win 2K |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arkansas - In the middle of everything.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 64
Liked 780 Times in 194 Posts
|
![]()
skooter -
Not that I remember. I did a litle post a few years back rationalizing the 305 for the U/SA wars, but nobody seemed interested. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|